Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:13 AM - New Topic ! Yak mechanic (Herb Coussons)
2. 06:02 AM - Re: Program Letter (Rich Langer)
3. 06:24 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (A. Dennis Savarese)
4. 06:44 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (Thomas Geoghegan)
5. 07:04 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (William Halverson)
6. 07:13 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (A. Dennis Savarese)
7. 07:14 AM - Re: Spam:*******, Re: Re: Program Letter (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
8. 07:17 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (A. Dennis Savarese)
9. 07:18 AM - Re: Spam:*******, Re: Re: Program Letter (A. Dennis Savarese)
10. 07:18 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
11. 07:39 AM - Re: Re: Program Letter (Mark Davis)
12. 09:47 AM - Re: Yak brake pads (psb777)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New Topic ! Yak mechanic |
Anyone have any recommendations for a knowledgable yak mechanic in Colorado? Or
close to there?
Herb
Dr. Herb Coussons, MD
drc@wscare.com
2641 Development Drive
Green Bay, WI 54311
Cell 920-639-8434
Work 920-338-6868
Fax 920-338-6869
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
O.K. Just one more question on this topic. What advantage is there to have the
300/600 mi. limitation removed from your O.L.'s? You still have to bring the program
letter with amendments with you, and you still have to fax any updates
to your events list and have that with you. What am I missing?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=341091#341091
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
The advantage is you don't have to be attending an event of any sort to
go beyond the 300 mile proficiency area. You can simply fly the
airplane anywhere you want to without having to be going to an event if
it is outside the 300 NM proficiency area.
If you're attending an EVENT that is not on your program letter, yes you
still have to send a fax to the FSDO regardless of whether it is/was
inside or outside of the 300 NM proficiency area. This is also true if
the 300 NM area is removed. But if your just going to visit your
relatives 800 miles away, you can do it without wondering if you'll get
ramped checked at your destination and be asked what event you're
attending and then having to show your Program Letter or amendment copy
with the "event" on it.
Dennis
On 5/26/2011 7:59 AM, Rich Langer wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Rich Langer"<rlanger2@comcast.net>
>
> O.K. Just one more question on this topic. What advantage is there to have the
300/600 mi. limitation removed from your O.L.'s? You still have to bring the
program letter with amendments with you, and you still have to fax any updates
to your events list and have that with you. What am I missing?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=341091#341091
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
So what defines an EVENT?
Last week Virginia Beach had their Warbirds over the Beach. Is that an event that
I would have to notify the FAA of even if it was within my 300nm area? How
about a fly-in? How about people that live within 300nm of Oshkosh? Do they have
to have that listed on their Program Letter?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
The advantage is you don't have to be attending an event of any sort to
go beyond the 300 mile proficiency area. You can simply fly the
airplane anywhere you want to without having to be going to an event if
it is outside the 300 NM proficiency area.
If you're attending an EVENT that is not on your program letter, yes you
still have to send a fax to the FSDO regardless of whether it is/was
inside or outside of the 300 NM proficiency area. This is also true if
the 300 NM area is removed. But if your just going to visit your
relatives 800 miles away, you can do it without wondering if you'll get
ramped checked at your destination and be asked what event you're
attending and then having to show your Program Letter or amendment copy
with the "event" on it.
Dennis
On 5/26/2011 7:59 AM, Rich Langer wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Rich Langer"<rlanger2@comcast.net>
>
> O.K. Just one more question on this topic. What advantage is there to have the
300/600 mi. limitation removed from your O.L.'s? You still have to bring the
program letter with amendments with you, and you still have to fax any updates
to your events list and have that with you. What am I missing?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=341091#341091
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
Insurance?
To fly a a/c or to participate in an event that requires it?
+-----Original Message-----
+From: Warren Hill [mailto:k7wx@earthlink.net]
+Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 07:34 PM
+To: yak-list@matronics.com
+Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
+
+
+Hello Keith,
+
+This is actually what I wrote.
+
+Warren
+
+On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Warren Hill wrote:
+
+> When I first got my CJ, one of the local CJ gurus told me to anticipate getting
ramp checked at every event attended. Told me to have a plastic folder in
the aft cockpit that contained:
+>
+> Copy of license and current medical.
+> Copy from logbook: Last BFR, last annual, warbird FFA inspection logbook entry.
+> Phase 2 operating limitations.
+> Current insurance info.
+> Picture of expiratory date tag(s) of parachute(s).
+> Program letter for current year.
+> Registration & special airworthiness certificate.
+> Copy of FAST card, if you have one.
+>
+> Warren
+
+
+
+On May 24, 2011, at 5:00 PM, keithmckinley wrote:
+
+>
+>
+> k7wx wrote:
+>> As you are not REQUIRED to carry a copy
+>> of the letter with you when traveling
+>>
+>> --
+>
+>
+> I know this subject is beat up but I've looked and can't find anything regarding
whether the PL needs to be with the airplane or not. I carry mine but didn't
think it was required. Then again, it seems that the PL may be an addendum
to the ops limits and that is required.....
+>
+> Keith
+>
+> --------
+> Keith McKinley
+> 700HS
+> KFIT
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> Read this topic online here:
+>
+> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=340846#340846
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
Yes, unfortunately, you do have to notify them even if it is within the
300 NM (assuming your OL's have not been updated). Many people believe
(including me at one time) that if an event was within the 300 NM area
you didn't have to notify the FSDO. I was told to read the OL's and
note there is no distinction regarding event distances. In other
words, regardless of the distance from your home base, any event you
attend must either be on your annual program letter or sent to the FSDO
as an amendment to the program letter.
Event is any activity where the aircraft will be exhibited or on display.
Dennis
On 5/26/2011 8:40 AM, Thomas Geoghegan wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Thomas Geoghegan<thomasg@infosysnetworks.com>
>
> So what defines an EVENT?
> Last week Virginia Beach had their Warbirds over the Beach. Is that an event
that I would have to notify the FAA of even if it was within my 300nm area? How
about a fly-in? How about people that live within 300nm of Oshkosh? Do they
have to have that listed on their Program Letter?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 9:22 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> The advantage is you don't have to be attending an event of any sort to
> go beyond the 300 mile proficiency area. You can simply fly the
> airplane anywhere you want to without having to be going to an event if
> it is outside the 300 NM proficiency area.
>
> If you're attending an EVENT that is not on your program letter, yes you
> still have to send a fax to the FSDO regardless of whether it is/was
> inside or outside of the 300 NM proficiency area. This is also true if
> the 300 NM area is removed. But if your just going to visit your
> relatives 800 miles away, you can do it without wondering if you'll get
> ramped checked at your destination and be asked what event you're
> attending and then having to show your Program Letter or amendment copy
> with the "event" on it.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/26/2011 7:59 AM, Rich Langer wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Rich Langer"<rlanger2@comcast.net>
>>
>> O.K. Just one more question on this topic. What advantage is there to have the
300/600 mi. limitation removed from your O.L.'s? You still have to bring the
program letter with amendments with you, and you still have to fax any updates
to your events list and have that with you. What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=341091#341091
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
I can ALWAYS use propeller blades! :-)
Truth of the matter, discussions on legal nonsense is just too much for me to deal
with. I was foolish to even add any comments. You never really know what's
right or wrong, all it ends up being is a discussion of what the words mean,
and in the end some JUDGE and some LAWYERS end up telling us we're ALL wrong!
Best of Luck,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Curtis White
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: Spam:*******, RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
Wow!!! Just when I was ready to sell you some propeller blades!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:14 PM
Subject: Spam:*******, RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
And you know what? It just never ends. Just when I thought I had made a
mistake, I might have been wrong. :-)
Read this:
8130.2G says:
(37) When an aircraft's home base is changed or there is a transfer of
ownership, the
new owner/operator will take any or all of the following actions within 30
days:
(a) Submit a new program letter to the geographically responsible FSDO.
(b) If an approved inspection program is specified in these operating
limitations,
submit a copy to the geographically responsible FSDO. The gaining FSDO will
not change the
previously approved program unless it can be substantiated that the
previously approved program
no longer meets FAA requirements.
(c) The gaining FSDO will not require the aircraft's airworthiness
certificate or
operating limitations to be reissued, unless the aircraft requires Phase I
test flight operations.
So, I would read that to mean that they won't change the Operating
Limitations.
The whole thing is a crock of dog poop. Who knows for sure WHAT anything
means.
Good luck... Mark's out of this one. ENOUGH already. I quit.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:54 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Ok.
I was wrong. The light bulb just went on.
Dennis, you are/were absolutely correct.
If you change your Operating Limitations in ANY way, that means you also are
going to HAVE to obtain a new Special Airworthiness Certificate because the
dates on the two documents MUST MATCH! Darn it, I hate when that happens,
but I do pride myself on at least being able to stand up and admit when I
screw up.
So... you change the Operating Limitations, you must get a new Airworthiness
Certificate along with it, and since it ALSO is new, 8130.2G will probably
apply.
I say "probably" because I don't even trust my own judgment when it comes to
FAA regulations, and I am not going to bother the EAA anymore with this.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:37 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Here is how the EAA Govt. Liason Division interprets these rules. These
people talk to those that MAKE the rules, not to local FISDO's that
INTERPRET the rules.
Thus I consider the EAA to be the best experts available unless you know
someone in Washington DC that works for the FAA.
And the answer the EAA writes below is EXACTLY why I took this issue up the
chain to get a better understanding.
What Dennis wrote is of course absolutely correct... he just didn't mention
8130.2G, paragraph 4107
And Dennis, I also (respectfully :-) once more disagree when you mention
that any changes made to CURRENT Operating Limitations will result in you
now being required to fall under 8130.2G, and thus get a whole NEW set of
Operating Limitations.
New Airworthiness Certificate .... yes. 8130.2G applies, and you will get
all new Operating Limitations and ... you will be required to carry your
Program Letter with you, etc.
Removal of an Operating Limitation from an EXISTING list of Operating
Limitations attached to an EXISTING Experimental Airworthiness Certificate
written under 8130.2F .... NO!
Mark Bitterlich
p.s. For a complete understanding read the response from the EAA contained
below.
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Hansen [mailto:rhansen@eaa.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
Mark, this is an issue that may differ from aircraft to aircraft based
on the issued operating limitations -
The FAR baseline for this requirement is FAR 21.193 - it says a program
letter must be submitted, it does not mention a annual requirement.
The second baseline is FAR 91.319(i) - it says the administrator may
prescribe additional limitations the administrator feels necessary.
**this means the FAA can change to operating limitations as
necessary to address and resolve safety and operations issues.
FAA Order 8130.2F (effective Nov 2004 - April 2011), limitation (37) -
the operator must submit an annual program letter.
**no requirement that the program letter must be carried on
board.
FAA Order 8130.2G (effective April 2011 - present), limitation (3) the
operator must submit an annual program letter...and a copy of the
program letter and any amendments must be carried on board the aircraft
any time that the aircraft is being operated.
**carrying the program letter is a new requirement.
FAA Order 8130.2G, paragraph 4107 d - states that "all previously issued
airworthiness certificates and operating limitations will remain valid
unless changes are requested by the applicant or reexamined by the FAA
in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709."
Bottom line - If your airworthiness certificate and operating
limitations were issued under an earlier edition of 8130.2 (editions A,
B, C, D. E, or F) then you do not have a requirement to carry a program
letter on board the aircraft. And since there is NO requirement to turn
in your existing documents for a new version issued under the new
8130.2G, you do not need to carry your program letter. This new
requirement will only apply to those experimental exhibition aircraft
issued an original airworthiness certificate on/after April 11, 2011.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
Any new Special Airworthiness Certificates and Operating Limitations
will be issued under 8130.2G. This includes any request for the change
to eliminate the 300/600 mile proficiency area that may currently be in
your existing OL's.
Dennis
On 5/25/2011 9:48 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> For those that are operating under the older 8130.2F, here is a
> paragraph that is included in all of the groups, including ours, Group
> III. Just for grins, see if there is a paragraph in your own OL's
> that says something like the following".
>
> "....(2) No person may operate this aircraft for other than the
> purpose of meeting the requirements
> of 91.319(b), as stated in the program letter (required by 21.193)
> for this aircraft. This aircraft must
> be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general
> operating rules of part 91, as well as all
> additional limitations herein prescribed under the provisions of
> 91.319(e). These operating limitations
> are a part of the special airworthiness certificate, and are to be
> carried in the aircraft at all times
> and made available to the pilot in command of the aircraft.
> (Applicability: All)
> Dennis
>
>
> On 5/25/2011 9:26 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
> 64E wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Just did :-)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>> Savarese
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:15 AM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> Mark, I respectfully request you read my next posting on the subject.
>> :-)
>>
>> On 5/25/2011 9:04 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
>> 64E wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>> Dennis, I respectfully disagree with your point of view in this one
>>> area.
>>>
>>> You mentioned:
>>>
>>> "The program letter and modifications which you may send by fax are in
>>> fact part of the Operating Limitations for the airplane. We all know
>>> you are required to carry the OL's in the airplane at all times.
>> Since
>>> the Program Letter is actually a part of the OL's, then IMHO, it is
>> also
>>> required to be carried in the airplane."
>>>
>>> The Operating Limitations also require a Conditional Inspection every
>>> year. By the same logic, you would also need to carry along a copy of
>>> your Conditional Inspection, or copies of your aircraft logbooks, etc.
>>> My opinion on dealing with the FAA on things like this is when they
>> say:
>>>
>>> "We need to see a copy of your Program Letter or modification of same,
>>> and if you don't have it with you, you must leave."
>>>
>>> NUMBER ONE: !!! Reply with: "Please quote the Regulation that
>>> specifically states I must carry a copy of my Program Letter with me.
>>> If you cannot quote me the exact regulation that requires me to do
>> this,
>>> I respectfully submit you have no authority to demand it from me".
>>>
>>> You must carry a copy of your Operating Limitations. READ THEM!
>> Break
>>> them out and have the FAA Inspector SHOW YOU on the Operating
>>> Limitations where it says what he is saying. THE BURDON OF PROOF IS
>> ON
>>> THE FAA, not on your to prove you are innocent. Sometimes certain FAA
>>> Inspectors forget that fact. Some Inspectors also assume that
>> anything
>>> they say is automatically correct. Anything you say is automatically
>>> wrong. You need to know your regulations and you also need the phone
>>> number to the EAA's Govt. Hotline. Ask for Randy Hanson.
>>>
>>> NUMBER TWO: If they still play nasty.... Go back to the motel, do a
>>> handwritten modification to your Program Letter on a paper napkin, go
>>> down to the Hotel Desk and FAX IT to your local FISDO. The go back to
>>> the airport and hand that FAA Inspector the paper napkin and bit him a
>>> fond farewell. I am not being sarcastic here. OK. The paper napkin
>>> part is supposed to be a joke (OK who-ever from the FAA READS THIS? A
>>> JOKE! PLEASE? Good grief).
>>>
>>> Not that I think you're wrong about carrying the stuff along. The FAA
>>> CONSTANTLY (!!!) interprets things differently and they can come up
>> with
>>> the strangest things (flying with my door off, etc) and you have to go
>>> to the ends of the Earth to get them to see things a little bit
>>> differently.
>>>
>>> Just saying. I think being polite but not cowardly is the best
>>> approach... my 2 cents.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>>> Savarese
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 10:47 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>>
>>> Here's something to think about.
>>> The program letter and modifications which you may send by fax are in
>>> fact part of the Operating Limitations for the airplane. We all know
>>> you are required to carry the OL's in the airplane at all times.
>> Since
>>> the Program Letter is actually a part of the OL's, then IMHO, it is
>> also
>>> required to be carried in the airplane.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, when the FAA removed the 300/600 NM proficiency area,
>>> they failed to include the elimination of the Program Letter, which
>>> would have made logical sense. ie: if you don't have any restrictions
>>> as to where you can fly, they why do you need a Program Letter to
>> attend
>>> an event?
>>>
>>> When you attend an event that may also be attended by the FAA
>> (typically
>>> when there is wavered airspace) and they ask to see your aircraft's
>>> paperwork as well as you pilot certificate and current medical form,
>>> when you hand him/her the aircraft's Operating Limitations he/she will
>>> also ask to see your Program Letter or modification for this specific
>>> event. If you do not have your Program Letter with the specific event
>>> on it or a modification/update to the program letter which you
>> submitted
>>> to your FSDO with you, the FAA person may not permit you to stay at
>> the
>>> event. I had this happen to me about 5 years ago. Thus, when I sent
>>> my program letter in to the FSDO each year, I automatically put a copy
>>> in the airplane along with any modifications.
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>> On 5/24/2011 9:00 PM, keithmckinley wrote:
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by:
>>> "keithmckinley"<keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
>>>> Mark,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>>>
>>>> No 300 mile restriction. No doubt it is easier to play nice with the
>>> Fed's and yes it does pay dividends, but sometimes I think it's
>>> important to make sure they interpret things correctly and realize
>> (as
>>> inspectors) they don't make the rules. More than anything, I just have
>>> an aversion to ass kissing.......but not to protecting my own ass!
>>>> Semper Fi
>>>>
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>> --------
>>>> Keith McKinley
>>>> 700HS
>>>> KFIT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=340874#340874
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
I'm not aware of any insurance requirements by the FAA. Some airshows
may require proof of liability insurance. Your policy may state
fly-by's are permitted and included in the policy coverage. It would
be best to discuss this issue with your insurance agent.
Dennis
On 5/26/2011 9:01 AM, William Halverson wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "William Halverson"<william@netpros.net>
>
>
> Insurance?
>
> To fly a a/c or to participate in an event that requires it?
>
>
> +-----Original Message-----
> +From: Warren Hill [mailto:k7wx@earthlink.net]
> +Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 07:34 PM
> +To: yak-list@matronics.com
> +Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
> +
> +--> Yak-List message posted by: Warren Hill<k7wx@earthlink.net>
> +
> +Hello Keith,
> +
> +This is actually what I wrote.
> +
> +Warren
> +
> +On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Warren Hill wrote:
> +
> +> When I first got my CJ, one of the local CJ gurus told me to anticipate getting
ramp checked at every event attended. Told me to have a plastic folder
in the aft cockpit that contained:
> +>
> +> Copy of license and current medical.
> +> Copy from logbook: Last BFR, last annual, warbird FFA inspection logbook
entry.
> +> Phase 2 operating limitations.
> +> Current insurance info.
> +> Picture of expiratory date tag(s) of parachute(s).
> +> Program letter for current year.
> +> Registration& special airworthiness certificate.
> +> Copy of FAST card, if you have one.
> +>
> +> Warren
> +
> +
> +
> +On May 24, 2011, at 5:00 PM, keithmckinley wrote:
> +
> +> --> Yak-List message posted by: "keithmckinley"<keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
> +>
> +>
> +> k7wx wrote:
> +>> As you are not REQUIRED to carry a copy
> +>> of the letter with you when traveling
> +>>
> +>> --
> +>
> +>
> +> I know this subject is beat up but I've looked and can't find anything regarding
whether the PL needs to be with the airplane or not. I carry mine but
didn't think it was required. Then again, it seems that the PL may be an addendum
to the ops limits and that is required.....
> +>
> +> Keith
> +>
> +> --------
> +> Keith McKinley
> +> 700HS
> +> KFIT
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +> Read this topic online here:
> +>
> +> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=340846#340846
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +>
> +
> +
> +
> +
> +
> +
> +
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
You've got that right Mark!!!
Dennis
On 5/26/2011 9:11 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
64E wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> I can ALWAYS use propeller blades! :-)
>
> Truth of the matter, discussions on legal nonsense is just too much for me to
deal with. I was foolish to even add any comments. You never really know what's
right or wrong, all it ends up being is a discussion of what the words mean,
and in the end some JUDGE and some LAWYERS end up telling us we're ALL wrong!
>
> Best of Luck,
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Curtis White
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 8:28 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Spam:*******, RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Curtis White"<curtiswhite@vipowernet.net>
>
> Wow!!! Just when I was ready to sell you some propeller blades!!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:14 PM
> Subject: Spam:*******, RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> And you know what? It just never ends. Just when I thought I had made a
> mistake, I might have been wrong. :-)
>
> Read this:
>
> 8130.2G says:
> (37) When an aircraft's home base is changed or there is a transfer of
> ownership, the
> new owner/operator will take any or all of the following actions within 30
> days:
> (a) Submit a new program letter to the geographically responsible FSDO.
> (b) If an approved inspection program is specified in these operating
> limitations,
> submit a copy to the geographically responsible FSDO. The gaining FSDO will
> not change the
> previously approved program unless it can be substantiated that the
> previously approved program
> no longer meets FAA requirements.
> (c) The gaining FSDO will not require the aircraft's airworthiness
> certificate or
> operating limitations to be reissued, unless the aircraft requires Phase I
> test flight operations.
>
> So, I would read that to mean that they won't change the Operating
> Limitations.
>
> The whole thing is a crock of dog poop. Who knows for sure WHAT anything
> means.
>
> Good luck... Mark's out of this one. ENOUGH already. I quit.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:54 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ok.
>
> I was wrong. The light bulb just went on.
>
> Dennis, you are/were absolutely correct.
>
> If you change your Operating Limitations in ANY way, that means you also are
> going to HAVE to obtain a new Special Airworthiness Certificate because the
> dates on the two documents MUST MATCH! Darn it, I hate when that happens,
> but I do pride myself on at least being able to stand up and admit when I
> screw up.
>
> So... you change the Operating Limitations, you must get a new Airworthiness
> Certificate along with it, and since it ALSO is new, 8130.2G will probably
> apply.
>
> I say "probably" because I don't even trust my own judgment when it comes to
> FAA regulations, and I am not going to bother the EAA anymore with this.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 6:37 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Here is how the EAA Govt. Liason Division interprets these rules. These
> people talk to those that MAKE the rules, not to local FISDO's that
> INTERPRET the rules.
>
> Thus I consider the EAA to be the best experts available unless you know
> someone in Washington DC that works for the FAA.
>
> And the answer the EAA writes below is EXACTLY why I took this issue up the
> chain to get a better understanding.
>
> What Dennis wrote is of course absolutely correct... he just didn't mention
> 8130.2G, paragraph 4107
>
> And Dennis, I also (respectfully :-) once more disagree when you mention
> that any changes made to CURRENT Operating Limitations will result in you
> now being required to fall under 8130.2G, and thus get a whole NEW set of
> Operating Limitations.
>
> New Airworthiness Certificate .... yes. 8130.2G applies, and you will get
> all new Operating Limitations and ... you will be required to carry your
> Program Letter with you, etc.
>
> Removal of an Operating Limitation from an EXISTING list of Operating
> Limitations attached to an EXISTING Experimental Airworthiness Certificate
> written under 8130.2F .... NO!
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> p.s. For a complete understanding read the response from the EAA contained
> below.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Hansen [mailto:rhansen@eaa.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 4:07 PM
> To: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> Mark, this is an issue that may differ from aircraft to aircraft based
> on the issued operating limitations -
>
> The FAR baseline for this requirement is FAR 21.193 - it says a program
> letter must be submitted, it does not mention a annual requirement.
>
> The second baseline is FAR 91.319(i) - it says the administrator may
> prescribe additional limitations the administrator feels necessary.
> **this means the FAA can change to operating limitations as
> necessary to address and resolve safety and operations issues.
>
> FAA Order 8130.2F (effective Nov 2004 - April 2011), limitation (37) -
> the operator must submit an annual program letter.
> **no requirement that the program letter must be carried on
> board.
>
> FAA Order 8130.2G (effective April 2011 - present), limitation (3) the
> operator must submit an annual program letter...and a copy of the
> program letter and any amendments must be carried on board the aircraft
> any time that the aircraft is being operated.
> **carrying the program letter is a new requirement.
>
> FAA Order 8130.2G, paragraph 4107 d - states that "all previously issued
> airworthiness certificates and operating limitations will remain valid
> unless changes are requested by the applicant or reexamined by the FAA
> in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44709."
>
> Bottom line - If your airworthiness certificate and operating
> limitations were issued under an earlier edition of 8130.2 (editions A,
> B, C, D. E, or F) then you do not have a requirement to carry a program
> letter on board the aircraft. And since there is NO requirement to turn
> in your existing documents for a new version issued under the new
> 8130.2G, you do not need to carry your program letter. This new
> requirement will only apply to those experimental exhibition aircraft
> issued an original airworthiness certificate on/after April 11, 2011.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:09 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> Any new Special Airworthiness Certificates and Operating Limitations
> will be issued under 8130.2G. This includes any request for the change
> to eliminate the 300/600 mile proficiency area that may currently be in
> your existing OL's.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/25/2011 9:48 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> For those that are operating under the older 8130.2F, here is a
>> paragraph that is included in all of the groups, including ours, Group
>> III. Just for grins, see if there is a paragraph in your own OL's
>> that says something like the following".
>>
>> "....(2) No person may operate this aircraft for other than the
>> purpose of meeting the requirements
>> of 91.319(b), as stated in the program letter (required by 21.193)
>> for this aircraft. This aircraft must
>> be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general
>> operating rules of part 91, as well as all
>> additional limitations herein prescribed under the provisions of
>> 91.319(e). These operating limitations
>> are a part of the special airworthiness certificate, and are to be
>> carried in the aircraft at all times
>> and made available to the pilot in command of the aircraft.
>> (Applicability: All)
>> Dennis
>>
>>
>> On 5/25/2011 9:26 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
>> 64E wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Just did :-)
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>>> Savarese
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:15 AM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>>
>>> Mark, I respectfully request you read my next posting on the subject.
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> On 5/25/2011 9:04 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
>>> 64E wrote:
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>> Dennis, I respectfully disagree with your point of view in this one
>>>> area.
>>>>
>>>> You mentioned:
>>>>
>>>> "The program letter and modifications which you may send by fax are in
>>>> fact part of the Operating Limitations for the airplane. We all know
>>>> you are required to carry the OL's in the airplane at all times.
>>> Since
>>>> the Program Letter is actually a part of the OL's, then IMHO, it is
>>> also
>>>> required to be carried in the airplane."
>>>>
>>>> The Operating Limitations also require a Conditional Inspection every
>>>> year. By the same logic, you would also need to carry along a copy of
>>>> your Conditional Inspection, or copies of your aircraft logbooks, etc.
>>>> My opinion on dealing with the FAA on things like this is when they
>>> say:
>>>> "We need to see a copy of your Program Letter or modification of same,
>>>> and if you don't have it with you, you must leave."
>>>>
>>>> NUMBER ONE: !!! Reply with: "Please quote the Regulation that
>>>> specifically states I must carry a copy of my Program Letter with me.
>>>> If you cannot quote me the exact regulation that requires me to do
>>> this,
>>>> I respectfully submit you have no authority to demand it from me".
>>>>
>>>> You must carry a copy of your Operating Limitations. READ THEM!
>>> Break
>>>> them out and have the FAA Inspector SHOW YOU on the Operating
>>>> Limitations where it says what he is saying. THE BURDON OF PROOF IS
>>> ON
>>>> THE FAA, not on your to prove you are innocent. Sometimes certain FAA
>>>> Inspectors forget that fact. Some Inspectors also assume that
>>> anything
>>>> they say is automatically correct. Anything you say is automatically
>>>> wrong. You need to know your regulations and you also need the phone
>>>> number to the EAA's Govt. Hotline. Ask for Randy Hanson.
>>>>
>>>> NUMBER TWO: If they still play nasty.... Go back to the motel, do a
>>>> handwritten modification to your Program Letter on a paper napkin, go
>>>> down to the Hotel Desk and FAX IT to your local FISDO. The go back to
>>>> the airport and hand that FAA Inspector the paper napkin and bit him a
>>>> fond farewell. I am not being sarcastic here. OK. The paper napkin
>>>> part is supposed to be a joke (OK who-ever from the FAA READS THIS? A
>>>> JOKE! PLEASE? Good grief).
>>>>
>>>> Not that I think you're wrong about carrying the stuff along. The FAA
>>>> CONSTANTLY (!!!) interprets things differently and they can come up
>>> with
>>>> the strangest things (flying with my door off, etc) and you have to go
>>>> to the ends of the Earth to get them to see things a little bit
>>>> differently.
>>>>
>>>> Just saying. I think being polite but not cowardly is the best
>>>> approach... my 2 cents.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>>>> Savarese
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 10:47 PM
>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>>>
>>>> Here's something to think about.
>>>> The program letter and modifications which you may send by fax are in
>>>> fact part of the Operating Limitations for the airplane. We all know
>>>> you are required to carry the OL's in the airplane at all times.
>>> Since
>>>> the Program Letter is actually a part of the OL's, then IMHO, it is
>>> also
>>>> required to be carried in the airplane.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, when the FAA removed the 300/600 NM proficiency area,
>>>> they failed to include the elimination of the Program Letter, which
>>>> would have made logical sense. ie: if you don't have any restrictions
>>>> as to where you can fly, they why do you need a Program Letter to
>>> attend
>>>> an event?
>>>>
>>>> When you attend an event that may also be attended by the FAA
>>> (typically
>>>> when there is wavered airspace) and they ask to see your aircraft's
>>>> paperwork as well as you pilot certificate and current medical form,
>>>> when you hand him/her the aircraft's Operating Limitations he/she will
>>>> also ask to see your Program Letter or modification for this specific
>>>> event. If you do not have your Program Letter with the specific event
>>>> on it or a modification/update to the program letter which you
>>> submitted
>>>> to your FSDO with you, the FAA person may not permit you to stay at
>>> the
>>>> event. I had this happen to me about 5 years ago. Thus, when I sent
>>>> my program letter in to the FSDO each year, I automatically put a copy
>>>> in the airplane along with any modifications.
>>>> Dennis
>>>>
>>>> On 5/24/2011 9:00 PM, keithmckinley wrote:
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by:
>>>> "keithmckinley"<keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>>>>
>>>>> No 300 mile restriction. No doubt it is easier to play nice with the
>>>> Fed's and yes it does pay dividends, but sometimes I think it's
>>>> important to make sure they interpret things correctly and realize
>>> (as
>>>> inspectors) they don't make the rules. More than anything, I just have
>>>> an aversion to ass kissing.......but not to protecting my own ass!
>>>>> Semper Fi
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>>> --------
>>>>> Keith McKinley
>>>>> 700HS
>>>>> KFIT
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=340874#340874
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
My Yak-50 doesn't have guns Doc, ... my UTVA-66 however is fully
equipped for light machine guns, rockets, and up to 350 pounds of bombs
on each wing hardpoint. :-)
That said, I'm interested in doing anything I haven't already done. I'm
also interested in learning how to do better, what I already can.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Copy, Mark. Program letter is already in the A/C's don't do tail slides
anyway. All it represents to is out of airspeed, out of energy, out of
options, and out of ideas making for a nice big fat target for a guns
snap shot. Why waste an Atoll or an AIM 9 when a wall of 20 mm will do?!
guess what I'm saying is I could care less about tail slides. ;^))
doc
Sent from my iPad
On May 25, 2011, at 5:22 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> No Hoopla. Put the copy in your airplane and DOC! DON'T DO ANY TAIL
SLIDES EITHER!
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 5:58 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
> What's all the hoop La? Make a copy and put it in the airplane.
> Doc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:09 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Program Letter
>
> --> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> Any new Special Airworthiness Certificates and Operating Limitations
will be
> issued under 8130.2G. This includes any request for the change to
eliminate
> the 300/600 mile proficiency area that may currently be in your
existing
> OL's.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/25/2011 9:48 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> For those that are operating under the older 8130.2F, here is a
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Program Letter |
Received this response from the Wichita FSDO.
Mark Davis
N44YK
Mark,
There is no change to the program letter or it's requirements.
There also was no change to the operating limitations. There is no need to
change them unless you make some kind of major change to the aircraft or its
location.
Thanks for being on top of things out there.
Richard F. Stevens
Rick Stevens
Principal Aviation Safety Inspector
Airworthiness
Wichita Flight Standards District Office ACE-07
1801 Airport Road Suite 300
Wichita, KS 67209
Phone: 316-941-1260
Fax: 316-941-1276
Richard.Stevens@faa.gov
From: "Mark Davis" <markdavis@wbsnet.org>
To: Richard Stevens/ACE/FAA@FAA
Date: 05/25/2011 10:56 AM
Subject: FAA 8130.2G
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick,
I just discovered that 8130.2F has been replaced by 8130.2G. Is there
anything I need to do on the operating limitations or program letter for my
YAK 52, N44YK? If so is it something I can do when I send in my program
letter for next year?
Thanks for you help as always!
Mark Davis
Clear Blue Skies, LLC
Syracuse, KS
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak brake pads |
Thanks to Dennis and Doug for very useful replies which I have forwarded to my
engineer for comment.
--------
Paul Beardsell
HA-YAB http://beardsell.com/flying/ha-yab
Yak-18T http://beardsell.com/flying/yak18t
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=341126#341126
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|